Grosso, Paul scripsit:
> Someone needs to review at least the first document in light of its use
> of XLink.
>
>
>
> Any volunteers?
I volunteer.
I have reviewed the document.
Here's my proposed message text:
The XLink 1.1 WD is in Last Call. The XML Core WG proposes that you
redefine the SML XLink Reference Scheme to use XLink 1.1 rather than
XLink 1.0.
In XLink 1.1, the xlink:type attribute with value "simple" is optional,
provided that an xlink:href attribute is present. Moving to XLink 1.1
would require the following editorial actions:
1) Remove item 1b from Section 2.
2) Add a new item 2c to Section 2, thus:
c. If an attribute information item whose [local name] is type,
whose [namespace name] is http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink is present,
its content is the string "simple".
3) Update at least one example to remove the xlink:type attribute.
4) Update the References section to refer to XLink 1.1.
5) Optionally add a claim of XLink 1.1 simple conformance. ("Simple
conformance" is a new term, and means that you understand simple links
but not extended links.)
--
Dream projects long deferred John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>
usually bite the wax tadpole. http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
--James Lileks